Contents

Studies

Akçam studied at the Middle East Technical University in Ankara. He was a faculty member of Administrative Sciences, Department of Political Economy. He received his Bachelor of Administrative Sciences in 1976. He stayed at the university as a Master's student and assistant in the same department for some time. In 1976 he was arrested and sentenced to 10 years imprisonment as the editor-in-chief of a political journal. He escaped prison one year later. He has been living in the Federal Republic of Germany since early 1978 as a political refugee. He continued his political actvities and in 1988 started working for the Hamburg Institute for Social Research on the history of violence and torture in Turkey. He earned his Doctorate Degree at The University of Hannover in 1995. The topic was called Turkish Nationalism and the Armenian Genocide on the Background of Military Tribunals in Istanbul between 1919 and 1922. Currently he belongs to the scientific staff of the Hamburg Foundation to promote science and culture, working at the Hamburg Institute for Social Research. Today, Akcam is currently a Visiting Associate Professor of History at the University of Minnesota.

Work

He has published various books and articles in English, German and Turkish on the subject of Turkish - Armenian relations.

"[Akçam] is one of the first Turkish academics to acknowledge and discuss openly the genocide of the Armenians by the Ottoman Turkish government in 1915 [...] This book represents the first scholarly attempt to both document the Genocide and understand that genocide from a perpetrator, rather than victim perspective, and to contextualize fully the events of 1915 within Turkey’s political history, and western political policies towards the region more generally."

"He is one of a handful of scholars who are challenging their homeland's insistent declarations that the organized slaughter of Armenians did not occur; and he is the first Turkish specialist to use the word "genocide" publicly in this context. His new book represents the first scholarly attempt to both document the Genocide and understand that genocide from a perpetrator, rather than victim perspective, and to contextualize fully the events of 1915 within Turkey's political history, and western political policies towards the region more generally."

External links

Non copyright free info

Akçam is the author of the recently published groundbreaking study From Empire to Republic: Turkish Nationalism and the Armenian Genocide, as well as Dialogue Across An International Divide: Essays Towards a Turkish-Armenian Dialogue, and numerous other books and articles. Through his research, writings, and lectures, he has worked tirelessly to help the Turkish people come to terms with their history and to bridge the gap between Turks and Armenians.

He has said of his approach to the issues covered in his new book, “Any effort towards democratization in the region today must begin with a dialogue about history and, most importantly, the events that transpired during the transition from Empire to Republic. Scholarly activity has been locked into a cycle of verification or denial of what happened in history, as opposed to analyzing the socio-political and historical factors that allowed that history to unfold.”

“[Akçam] is one of the first Turkish academics to acknowledge and discuss openly the genocide of the Armenians by the Ottoman Turkish government in 1915,” commented genocide scholar Vahakn Dadrian. “This book represents the first scholarly attempt to both document the Genocide and understand that genocide from a perpetrator, rather than victim perspective, and to contextualize fully the events of 1915 within Turkey’s political history, and western political policies towards the region more generally.”

Taner Akçam was born in northeastern Turkey and became interested in politics at an early age. He was active in Turkish politics until he fled to Germany as a political refugee. For many years, in the face of great adversity, he has worked to create a dialogue between Turks and Armenians. He received a Ph.D. from Hanover University in Germany. Currently he is Visiting Associate Professor of History at the University of Minnesota – Twin Cities.

The Armenian Taboo and Mustafa Kemal

By Taner Akçam

Yeni Binyil
Sunday, 8 October 2000.

Translated from Turkish by Sayat, EXCLUSIVELY for ANN/Groong

The uproar over the "Genocide Bill" continues. But these developments
are no surprise. There is a nice saying: what is going to come on
Thursday is obvious from Wednesday. Turkey is already cracking open
the last taboo area of the [Turkish] Republic. Despite all the fuss
and all the threats, we will have to see that we will, finally, have
to start openly discussing the murders committed against the Armenians
by the Committee of Union and Progress [Ittihad ve Terakki or Young
Turks]. I don't know if they will ever call it a "Genocide" or when it
will happen, but the Turkish Government will be forced to accept this
historical fact.

Because, the Republic's final taboo is being cracked open. It is a
historical process. It cannot be stopped by hurling obscenities,
threats, or blackmail. The reason is simple: the Turkish Republic was
founded on five taboos. 1) There are no classes in Turkey -- we are a
tightly-knit mass; 2) There are no Kurds in Turkey. They are all
mountain-roving Turks; 3) We are a westernized and secular nation.
The existence of [our] Islamic culture is not even a topic for
discussion; 4) There was no Armenian Genocide. The Armed Forces were
assigned the duty to be watchful and defend this nation which was
founded on these four taboos. It was illegal to discuss the influence
of the military over the regime, and this was the 5th taboo.

It was considered a crime to talk about any of these taboo areas.
Statutes in the Criminal Law like 142-4, 163, 125, etc. were
legislated [for this purpose]. But overseers of each of the taboos
made their presence felt and military coops, tortures, and deaths
ensued. As a nation we suffered a lot but at the end the taboos
disappeared one by one. In fact, through a timetable in accordance
with the Helsinki decisions, it was resolved that these were a part of
Turkey's realities and that they needed solutions. What we call the
democratization package is nothing more than the recognition of these
taboo areas and remedying them accordingly. Freedom of thought, steps
needed to be taken regarding the Kurdish question, lessening the
influence of the military over the regime, etc.... Turkey will
become democratic only to the extent that it overcomes the taboos.

Note that of all of these taboos, only the Armenian Genocide issue had
remained. Because there was nobody around to bring this issue up
internally, there was no criminal law against it. However along with
globalization and the membership process in the European Union, this
issue will come or be brought before us with increasing intensity.
There is a decision that was taken by the European Parliament in 1987.
In order to become an EU member, it requires Turkey to admit to the
reality of the Armenian Genocide and this admission, it is stressed,
will not have binding responsibilities on Turkey's part. Since Europe
cannot back away from this decision, it is up to Turkey to decide.

The matter is actually clear. In a nation that wants to be democratic,
there can be no subject that would be illegal to discuss. A free
society does not tolerate a taboo. In the end Turkey will admit that
in 1915 a great human tragedy occurred. Just as the Kurdish reality is
accepted [in Turkey] today despite the obstinacy and cries like "there
are no Kurds, they are mountain-dwelling Turks", the reality of 1915
will too be accepted. The most important thing is that they must not
be put on the agenda by foreign pressures and not come with a high
price tag. 30,000 people should not have died for the Kurdish reality
to be accepted.

Unfortunately, it is beyond debate that the events of 1915 qualify as
genocide according to the 1948 UN definitions. Anyone involved in the
issue with even a rough knowledge of the documents in the Ottoman,
German, Austrian, Armenian, and British archives knows that the facts
in these archives do not contradict, but on the contrary, support each
other. And the underlying point is that the Ottoman subject Armenians
were systematically murdered and left to die.

The claims that the events of 1915 does not constitute genocide cannot
be addressed one by one. Here, I will suffice to say that the thesis
put forward by some of our writers that a racist ideology is needed to
call a mass murder a genocide can not be taken seriously. In reality,
the question has several dimentions that go beyond the dilemma whether
to call it genocide or not. Here, I would like to underline and bring
forth one of these points I see everyone has forgotten about.

The fact that the Armenians were destroyed by the Ittihad was not even
a debate topic.

The fact that what occurred in 1915 was a mass murder is accepted by
anyone who lived at that time -- even by the leaders of the War of
Independence. It may come as a surprise, but this is the truth. Of
course the word genocide is quite new. It came into existence after
World War II. During the [Turkish] War of Independence words like
massacre, mass murder, and deportation were used. There were tens of
speeches in which Mustafa Kemal described what was done to the
Armenians as "cowardly [act]" and "savagery" and qualified them as
massacre. In September of 1919, the American General Harbord upon
visiting Mustafa Kemal said "he [Kemal] denounced the massacre of the
Armenians." According to Kemal, "the massacre and deportation of the
Armenians was the handiwork of a tiny committee that took over the
government" (Rauf Orbay'in Hatiralari, Yakin Tarihimiz [Rauf Orbay's
Memoirs, Our Recent History], Vol. 3, s. 179). In the same period, in
an interview with the US Radio newspaper he says "we have no
expansionist plans....We guarantee there will be no new Turkish
atrocities against the Armenians" (Bilal Simsir, British Documents on
Ataturk, Volume I, page 171, Ankara 1973). In a telegram he sent to
Kazim Karabekir in May 1920, he asks Karabekir to avoid any
undertaking that may be construed as another Armenian massacre. In a
speech he made at the National Assembly on April 24, he called what
the Armenians were subjected to in 1915 as "cowardly [act]"
(Ataturk'un TBMM Acik ve Kapali Oturumlarindaki Konusmalari [Ataturk's
Speeches in the Open and Closed Sessions of the Turkish Grand National
Assembly], Volume I, page 59) and so on and so forth.

In those years whether the events of 1915 were a genocide was not even
a topic of debate. In fact, it was being openly stated that the guilty
would be punished. In September of 1919 there were a series of
correspondances between the Ali Riza Pasha cabinet and Mustafa Kemal.
Defense Secretary Cemal, representing Istanbul, asked Mustafa Kemal's
Congress of Representatives [i.e. the precursor of the Grand National
Assembly] to issue a declaration announcing that "those guilty of all
sorts of murders during the War will not escape lawful punishment."
In his response Mustafa Kemal says "it is our great aspiration to show
that the big and small is equal in responsiblity in our country and
that the era of perfect rule of law commenced in an entirely impartial
and perfectly just fashion by bringing the wartime misrule into the
open and meting out punishment". Moreover, he adds that he saw this
punishment would be "more appropriate and beneficial to show it to
friend and foe alike if it was actually put into practise rather than
remaining as publicity on paper, as the latter case would cause many
questions to be raised". In other words, what Kemal expected was
punishment not for the sake of paper publicity but a real one (Nutuk
[Ataturk's Oration], Volume III, Vesikalar, Vesika 141-2, s. 164-6).

The issue of trials for those guilty of massacre were taken up in
Amasya negotiations. During the discussions, five protocols, three
open and signed, and two secret and unsigned were agreed upon. In the
first protocole from October 21, 1919 "the reawakening of the
Ittihadism and the Ittihadist spirit in the country and even the
display of some of its symbols is politically harmful.....The legal
punishment of the guilty in connection with the deportations is
necessary [both] judicially and politically". The third protocol is
about the upcoming general elections. An agreement was reached on the
necessity of barring the Ittihadists wanted for the Armenian
massacres. For that purpose, the Anatolian movement [Congress of
Representatives] reserved the right to interfere in the elections.
"Since it is not acceptable that individuals assembling as
representatives be connected to the evils of the Ittihad and tarnished
by the [participation in the] acts of deportation and massacre and
other evils against the true interests of the nation and the country,
all necessary steps can be taken to oppose such a direction (Nutuk,
Volume III, Vesika 159-160, s. 193-4).

It is possible to present pages and pages of [similar] examples. Here
is what I want to get across: the fact that the events of 1915 were a
mass killing was never a matter of dispute. The main issue of the time
was the desire [by the Allies] to divvy up Anatolia on the pretext of
punishing the Turks and using the events of 1915 as a justification.
What Kemal and his friends were proposing was the punishment of the
guilty but without the division of Anatolia. Today, instead of the
hysterical cries, if we assumed an attitude as Mustafa Kemal did
regarding the subject, we would have made great headway.